Z7-Z6 Lenses

1679111230

Comments

  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member
    I'm liking the depth of field scale on the 24-70 f/2.8. That doesn't exist on the G version.

    On my Z I am using the focus peaking feature for depth of field estimates, but the scale is something I miss from the old days.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 624Member
    edited March 2019
    @Symphotic yes, that was easier, but you can set one of the FN buttons for a preview and view the result direct in the EVF, somewhat the same as the DSLR's, to see the DOF in the EVF works good for me.
    Post edited by Ton14 on
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,638Member
    Symphotic said:

    I'm liking the depth of field scale on the 24-70 f/2.8. That doesn't exist on the G version.

    On my Z I am using the focus peaking feature for depth of field estimates, but the scale is something I miss from the old days.

    What I would love to see is a depth of field estimate that allowed you to dial in a circle of confusion.
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 624Member
    Great idea, hope that a Nikon developer read this.
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,452Moderator
    That WOULD be a nice thing to be first to market with!
    Always learning.
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member


    What I would love to see is a depth of field estimate that allowed you to dial in a circle of confusion.

    Cool idea! What would you use? I 'm sure Nikon used 0.03 for their old lenses, but yes, distances change substantially if you want to use 0.02, which is more appropriate for DX. For my work, I generally shoot about a meter from the subject. The 50 mm lens gives about 0.25 meters DOV at f/11 but with the ability to crop in on my subject, the FX camera can be like a DX or even a Nikon 1 crops (0.01 mm CofC).

    So the quick to think of it is to take your expected DOF and multiply by 2/3 for DX and 1/3 for deeper crops. Since the Z lenses will only go on FX bodies, the calculation is only if you want to crop after shooting (which I always do).

    The problem for composition is if you overthink this problem, you never take the picture!

    Industrial photographers and landscape photographers need this feature more than most others.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,638Member
    I am not sure what I would use. That I would figure out with trial and error.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,452Moderator
    Symphotic said:


    What I would love to see is a depth of field estimate that allowed you to dial in a circle of confusion.


    Industrial photographers and landscape photographers need this feature more than most others.
    Macro photographers too.
    Always learning.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,638Member
    Further, the focus peaking indicators should also be based on the dialed in COC.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,452Moderator
    Loving this idea....
    Always learning.
  • BVSBVS Posts: 440Member
    Our friend Ricci has a new 24-70 f/2.8 S first look video up, where he shows all the different features of the lens. No comparison images yet though.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=mUq4PlRE6sY
    D7100, 85 1.8G, 50 1.8G, 35 1.8G DX, Tokina 12-28 F4, 18-140, 55-200 VR DX
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member
    BVS said:

    Our friend Ricci has a new 24-70 f/2.8 S first look video up, where he shows all the different features of the lens.....

    Nice video. I am looking forward to getting this lens. I've already got my 82 mm polarizing filter.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 2,384Member
    Yep it was a good video. He's not exactly an impartial observer since he works for Nikon but still if you keep that in mind I think his videos can be pretty informative.

  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member
    mhedges said:

    ... He's not exactly an impartial observer since he works for Nikon but still if you keep that in mind I think his videos can be pretty informative....

    His video has a lot more information than what I have had up to now. I placed an order early on with the option to cancel if I change my mind, but so far I haven't seen anything that suggests this isn't a good lens purchase.
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,638Member
    Here is Thom's review of the 50:

    https://www.sansmirror.com/lenses/lens-reviews/lenses-for-nikon-z/nikon-50mm-f18-s-lens-revie.html

    In a nutshell:

    The new Nikkor is clearly better than the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art I tested at f/1.8, center, DX boundary, and FX corner.

    And for the dimwits criticizing it for being to expensive:

    Is that worth US$600? It is if you need and use this focal length, in my opinion. Considering how good it is, I'd also consider it a bargain at this price. Unfortunately, most people are used to buying inexpensive 50mm optics, so they see the US$600 price as high. They're wrong. You clearly get what you pay for here, and more than you'll expect.

    Can't wait to see what the 50 1.2 and 58 0.95 are like!
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 2,384Member
    Yep it looks good. I’m waiting for the 85 1.8 myself.
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 537Member
    edited March 2019
    Nikon's FX 50mm f/1.4 costs twice as much as the FX f/1.8. By Tom's logic, the f/1.4 should cost less than the f/1.8 then since it's no sharper.

    The fact of the matter is, most of a len's price is determined by the aperture size. Even though the f/1.8 S is sharp, it's still a 50mm f/1.8 lens.
    Post edited by tc88 on
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 624Member
    The new lenses are fully aligned with the new body's and very good.

    My whole life i have been walking around with 50mm lenses and never had the Image quality I have now with the Nikon Z6 and the 50 mm f / 1.8 S. Photos made with ISO 6400 and 1/8 sec. shutter speed by hand has never been possible for me, now it is.

    I never thought that the (24mp) Nikon Z6 with the 24-70 mm f / 4 S could reach the IQ of my (36mp) combination Nikon D810 and the 24-70 mm f / 2.8, it does, but € 2000 cheaper. (85mm f/1.8 come quick please).

    Well, the Nkon Z6 is doing much better, the highest ISO I used was 3200, but now photo's with ISO 12.800 and only noise corrections in Lightroom gives so much detail that I can use them, unbelievable.

    I can also photograph with 1/8 sec. by hand and photo's with ISO 50 - f/8 - 1/250 sec. ................... just wow.

    In short, endless possibilities for me.
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,638Member
    tc88 said:

    Nikon's FX 50mm f/1.4 costs twice as much as the FX f/1.8. By Tom's logic, the f/1.4 should cost less than the f/1.8 then since it's no sharper.

    The fact of the matter is, most of a len's price is determined by the aperture size. Even though the f/1.8 S is sharp, it's still a 50mm f/1.8 lens.

    Oh I don't know. The difference between the 50mm 1.8G and 1.8S is quite a bit. And given that one is the best 50 autofocus that money can buy (the MF Otus may be slightly better) and the other is a relative piece of junk, I think that something other than aperture is driving the price - and legitimately so.
  • mhedgesmhedges Posts: 2,384Member
    @ton14 just FYI there’s no benefit to shooting at ISO 50 on Z6. I believe it’s actually slightly worse than shooting at base ISO.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,638Member
    Ton14 said:

    The new lenses are fully aligned with the new body's and very good.

    My whole life i have been walking around with 50mm lenses and never had the Image quality I have now with the Nikon Z6 and the 50 mm f / 1.8 S. Photos made with ISO 6400 and 1/8 sec. shutter speed by hand has never been possible for me, now it is.

    I never thought that the (24mp) Nikon Z6 with the 24-70 mm f / 4 S could reach the IQ of my (36mp) combination Nikon D810 and the 24-70 mm f / 2.8, it does, but € 2000 cheaper. (85mm f/1.8 come quick please).

    Well, the Nkon Z6 is doing much better, the highest ISO I used was 3200, but now photo's with ISO 12.800 and only noise corrections in Lightroom gives so much detail that I can use them, unbelievable.

    I can also photograph with 1/8 sec. by hand and photo's with ISO 50 - f/8 - 1/250 sec. ................... just wow.

    In short, endless possibilities for me.

    I too wonder about shooting at ISO 50, but besides that, I think you are largely correct in your assessment and optimism. While I am a D800 shooter upgrading to a D850 shooter, the lens progression that you describe from a 24-70 2.8 (G I assume) to a 24-70 f/4.0 S would produce superior resolution.


    I would only say this - if you are pixel peeping, those lenses are sharp enough to benefit from the extra resolution of the Z7. I do not know this from directly testing this particular progression. But I will use my 105 1.4E or 28 1.4E as an example. The S lenses are of a similar optical quality, and these two E's definitely benefited from the D800 - D850 upgrade. Is it a "breakthrough"? No. But it is certainly noticeable.
  • BVSBVS Posts: 440Member
    Ton14 said:

    The new lenses are fully aligned with the new body's and very good.

    My whole life i have been walking around with 50mm lenses and never had the Image quality I have now with the Nikon Z6 and the 50 mm f / 1.8 S. Photos made with ISO 6400 and 1/8 sec. shutter speed by hand has never been possible for me, now it is.

    I never thought that the (24mp) Nikon Z6 with the 24-70 mm f / 4 S could reach the IQ of my (36mp) combination Nikon D810 and the 24-70 mm f / 2.8, it does, but € 2000 cheaper. (85mm f/1.8 come quick please).

    Well, the Nkon Z6 is doing much better, the highest ISO I used was 3200, but now photo's with ISO 12.800 and only noise corrections in Lightroom gives so much detail that I can use them, unbelievable.

    I can also photograph with 1/8 sec. by hand and photo's with ISO 50 - f/8 - 1/250 sec. ................... just wow.

    In short, endless possibilities for me.

    Exactly. I think the best way to describe the Z cameras is "freedom".
    • Freedom from (at least some) weight and bulk, compared to previous FX cameras. It feels even lighter and less bulky than my old D7100.
    • Freedom from the shackles of the viewfinder. With the flip screen and OSPDAF you can hold the camera pretty much however you want, wherever you want, which opens up lots of possibilities since it doesn't have to be glued to your face anymore.
    • Freedom (mostly) from the tyranny of AF fine tune. AF-S in particular is super accurate.
    • Freedom from unnecessary high shutter speeds. Lower shutter speeds are much more hand-holdable with IBIS.
    • Freedom from shutter shock with silent shooting and EFCS in all modes.
    • Freedom from unnecessary AF point juggling. Face (and soon to be eye) detect takes care of that for you, so you can focus more on composition.
    • Freedom from needing a second camera for video. They do both stills and video well.
    Just to name a few.
    D7100, 85 1.8G, 50 1.8G, 35 1.8G DX, Tokina 12-28 F4, 18-140, 55-200 VR DX
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 624Member
    edited March 2019
    @mhedges When you shoot with nice weather, blue sky everything perfect, with ISO 100 I always had some (luminance) noise in the sky, with the D810, ISO 64 was so clean and I see the same with the Nikon Z6. I check it with the sharpening slider.
    Post edited by Ton14 on
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 624Member
    edited March 2019
    @BVS yeah, thanks for the additions, weight almost 1 kilo less and so well build. The flip screen, twice through the knees and back per day is the max. on my age now, lol.

    I have everything I wanted but I'm greedy, come on with the autofocus firmware upgrade, the 85mm f/1.8 and the 70-200mm f/2.8 and I'am settled for the next 5 years.
    Post edited by Ton14 on
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member
    edited March 2019
    Producing lenses that perform well optically is much more expensive than producing adequately performing lenses. It gets exponentially harder as you seek marginally better performance. Optics are like that.

    I originally didn't understand why Nikon chose to go with f/1.8 when introducing a completely new camera. I still think it was a bad marketing call, but f/ number is only one figure of merit, and there are many more figures of merit in optical design. Some are trade offs with aperture and some are not. Nikon did the best thing for overall performance, and they did it right.

    I am quite impressed with the 50 mm f/1.8S. My Sigma is not getting used any more, despite the 0.4 better figure of merit for the f/number.

    Nikon: build a Micro-Nikkor S-line lens!
    Post edited by Symphotic on
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
Sign In or Register to comment.